Authorâs Note
On the dedication page of this book, the names of people engaged in the work in Staveley from 1969â1972 are recorded with gratitude. In much of the text, however, some of these names are replaced by pseudonyms. The reasons for this decision, made when the book was first written in 1976, are first, a wish not to offend or embarrass participants, their relatives or descendants. Since most of the participants have now died, this motive may be less salient than it once was: but it is still relevant.
The second reason remains salient. In writing the original text, I undertook a reflective analysis of what I called consciousness/language. This analysis plays a significant part in the argument, leading me towards the conclusion that some (by no means all) of the consciousness/language of many people in Staveley â and everywhere else in the world â is inauthentic and imitative, deriving usually from dominant values and centralised sources of opinion in the worlds of politics, religion, the media, education, consumer capitalism and state welfarism. The material to which I refer presents itself as authoritative, usually in an impersonal and generalising style. The processes by which such consciousness/language is communicated and introjected can be thought of as internalising the oppressor, linguistic domination, socio-cultural hegemony, or all of these three.
I still hold this view today. If anything, the situation is now much worse, with ruthless colonisation and systematic manipulation of peopleâs consciousness/language (both on the surface and at deeper levels), for example by the big information technology companies, the mass media, state bureaucracies and some political parties and governments.
The analysis of consciousness/language can be misunderstood as character analysis. That may occasionally appear to be its effect, but its purpose is to reflect upon some of the ways in which peopleâs souls are penetrated, occupied and managed for a variety of often harmful ends. I have to admit that I now have some feelings of unease about the analysis of consciousness/language as a practice.
The critical assessment of aspects of popular consciousness in this book is accompanied by deep appreciation of the many acts of authentic communication which grace the pages of Staveley Now.